Detroit, Bankrupt. Any sympathy ?

JohnMc1 wrote: »

You're an idiot. I've been working since I was 16. I don't criticize people who need it. I criticize the ones that can work but don't because they feel entitled to something. Welfare should not be permanent. Anybody with a brain can figure that out.

Did I upset you? Why wouldn't you criticize people who need it. Yeah you might have paid enough in tax for college but the rest of it I'd doubt it very much. You criticized anyone who is a user of long term welfare but didn't explain who they are, then you justified your welfare pay out by saying you paid it through taxes.

Single parent families one of the leading causes of poverty, what do they do throw the kid out on the street? They'll be on it for at least 18 years.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013/06/23/welfare-state-doesnt-adequately-describe-how-much-americas-poor-control-your-wallet/

It's very easy to say, I don't think anyone who doesn't deserve it shouldn't get welfare. As a matter of interest can you define these lifetime loafers and what percentage of population are we talking about in Detroit for example.

And as I've made the point what about a single Mother who is a useless sack of sh#t and won't work a day in her life but has 3 wonderful kids who even with welfare go hungry - the kids won't be taken away because of legal paperwork, what do you do? Ask any teacher or person who works with kids it is one of the most upsetting things to see a kid come to school with no lunch because the parent(s) don't care. Volunteer in an inner city school and if it happens I guarantee you you'll be choking back tears. Do you have any idea how hard it would hit kids like that - they would have absolutely no chance of getting out or improving their life. And its kids like that that make it okay to pay the useless sacks of sh#t out there because its not really for them. I'd love if you could target them and there'd be no other people hurt but there won't and there can't be.

But ah yeah read this if you want http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3677

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Are you thick or trolling? I've made myself clear. If you're on welfare or barely support yourself you should not be having kids. This is common sense and a thing called Personal Responsibility. You're trying to accuse me of wanting kids to starve. Well what the hell do you think will happen when the system eventually goes broke? I was screaming at TV one day when I was watching about a welfare office in the Us had a computer glitch and they didn't pay out that day. This Woman had the gall to get on camera and say "somebody better take care of me and my 15 kids" I was literally yelling "you're supposed to be taking care of you and your 15 kids you ****ing waste of space" I don't know how anybody with a brain can defend this kind of behaviour.

You're totally missing the point and becoming abusive - there is no effective way to stop the welfare payments tot he layabouts without hitting those who shouldn't be affected. So what do think we should leave them starve now. The problem isn't with finding the money its terrible decisions and in places like Ireland - pure greed and corruption coupled with massive cronyism and unfair debt. What do you propose a licence for having children? I agree they shouldn't be having them but how can you stop them - they have these children whether someone will take care of them or not

Yeah shes a bit of a crackpot but what can you do - I agree with you I'd love to get rid of the layabouts thery're slowly sucking the life out of the system but at the moment the kids exist and its the irresponsible ones that are the worst. I guarantee you shes a sh#te Mother. The ones that are the worst are the abusive ones who will not let anyone else look after their child and continue to pop them out year after year. Its not the parents I'm worried about they can be either decide to pull up their socks or be thrown in tot he sea I don't care. What I'm worried about is what effect it would have on said children. Think about the consequences to what you're asking what would actually happen?

But all along you had been saying it was longtime welfare when 9/10 in the u.s. are actually not layabouts - its not the layabouts that are the problem its the way economies are run.

If you're screaming at the tv then you need to relax a bit and realise that there's little or nothing you can do about it in front of the tv screen, write to your td and ask them what they are going to do about the situation etc. or run a campaign yourself. Tbh if you ran with get rid of long term welfare then I'd say you'd get a fair few votes.

We had a glitch here in Ireland actually http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056993856

Yeh I have sympathy. But is it bad-ass and cool not to? Because if so, I have no sympathy.

.. reminds me I had such a crush on "colleen mcmurphy"